Application of OSNA Nomogram in Patients With Macrometastatic Sentinel Lymph Node: A Retrospective Assessment of Accuracy.
Breast neoplasms
axilla
lymph node excision
nomograms
nucleic acid amplification techniques
sentinel lymph node
Journal
Breast cancer : basic and clinical research
ISSN: 1178-2234
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer (Auckl)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101474356
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
28
08
2020
accepted:
14
04
2021
entrez:
17
5
2021
pubmed:
18
5
2021
medline:
18
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Almost 50% to 70% of patients who undergo axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) because of a single metastatic sentinel lymph node (SLN) have no further metastatic nodes at the axillary histology. On these grounds, the one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) nomogram was designed and validated. As a mathematical model, calculated through tumor size (expressed in millimeters) and CK19 mRNA copy number, it is thought to predict nonsentinel lymph node (NSLN) status. The aim of the study is to verify the diagnostic accuracy of the OSNA nomogram in a group of patients with macrometastatic SLN, with a retrospective analysis. The OSNA nomogram was retrospectively applied to a group of 66 patients with macrometastatic SLN who underwent ALND. The result of the final histology of the axillary cavity was compared to the nomogram prediction. We calculated the prevalence of NSLN metastasis in patients who underwent ALND, sensitivity and specificity, negative and positive predictive value of the nomogram. In patients with macrometastasis in SLN, the prevalence of patients with metastatic NSLN was 45%. The sensitivity of the nomogram was excellent (90%). The specificity was low (36%). Positive predictive value amounted to 54%, while negative predictive value was good (81%). These results suggest that the OSNA nomogram is a valid instrument that can help choose the best surgical strategy for the treatment of axillary cavity. The mathematical model is useful to avoid surgery in a selected group of patients because it accurately predicts NSLN status.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33994790
doi: 10.1177/11782234211014796
pii: 10.1177_11782234211014796
pmc: PMC8113365
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
11782234211014796Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2021.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of conflicting interests:The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Références
Ann Surg. 2012 Jan;255(1):109-15
pubmed: 22167004
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Nov 04;34:136
pubmed: 26538019
Ann Surg. 2007 Mar;245(3):452-61
pubmed: 17435553
Arch Surg. 2011 Sep;146(9):1035-40
pubmed: 21931000
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Jul;39(7):766-73
pubmed: 23607911
Surgery. 2000 Jul;128(1):6-12
pubmed: 10876178
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Apr;14(4):297-305
pubmed: 23491275
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2016 Dec 8;35(1):193
pubmed: 27931238
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006 Feb;95(3):279-93
pubmed: 16163445
J Clin Oncol. 1999 Jun;17(6):1720-6
pubmed: 10561208
J Clin Pathol. 2004 Jan;57(1):73-6
pubmed: 14693840
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011 Apr;37(4):290-9
pubmed: 21316185
Mol Clin Oncol. 2017 Nov;7(5):755-762
pubmed: 29142748
Ecancermedicalscience. 2017 Apr 07;11:732
pubmed: 28491135
Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Aug 15;13(16):4807-16
pubmed: 17699859
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013 May;139(1):87-93
pubmed: 23576079
BMC Cancer. 2008 Mar 04;8:66
pubmed: 18315887
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999 Feb 17;91(4):368-73
pubmed: 10050871
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014 Sep;147(2):371-80
pubmed: 25164972
Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Jan;14(1):181-9
pubmed: 17028772
Breast Cancer. 2019 Jul;26(4):471-477
pubmed: 30617675